Response to “Forsaken Lives” and a much better proposal “Abortion Reformation”.

Posted by on Oct 17, 2012 in Health

Introduction I have read over “Forsaken Lives” from the Center for Reproductive Rights, New York. This document is intended to sway the Philippine Parliament into changing it’s abortion laws, retrogressively. It is long, repititious and boring. It makes it’s case repeatedly based on the “suffering” of certain women who did not have a “clean, safe abortion”. This is not the way to build a case because it is very easy to find just as many cases who were denied an abortion and now live happily with the child they intended to abort.

Logic and Fact. Arguments are advanced by fact. Fact is discerned by sceince. In their 523 end notes there was not one scientifc article that even attempted to show abortion is good for women or families or the nation. This is not surprizing, because there is no evidence of benefit to patients or their society for being aborted. There are no scientific indications. The growing evidence, easily produced from many studies, show that women are harmed by abortion. They are harmed and only harmed 99.98% of the time. If women are harmed, so is the family. If the family is harmed, so is the nation. Especially now days, the nation is hurt morally and economically from abortions by choice. It is abundantly clear that no country can run a free market economy on a declining population. What was true when I asserted this in the Philippines when I was there a few years ago, is even more true now. It must be shouted out by every politician that has the best interests of his/her country at heart. The Philippines is giving away their greatest asset and advantage (people), in world markets if they allow freely available abortion. In a short time they will also have popultation implosion. Of course the US etc would like to reduce the Philippine’s advantage but Philippinoes would be laughable fools to do reduce their people making capability..

Switch the argument It is time to switch the argument from theology to science, from crime and emotion to pragmatism. You should argue, “Of course we will support every women’s right to good medical practice, including abortion, when and if science shows it is necessary and good for women and families”. Get all the friendly politicians to emphasize this to the media and their colleaques. It is a mother-hood statement that even the most militant proaborting feminists must agree with or appear to be unconcerned about the quality of women’s health. The government should insist all doctors practice good evidence based medicine all the time for every medication and every procedure, including abortion. Prosecute the doctors for practicing poor medicine, not the women. Since doctors hate to have court actions brought against them, it will quickly stop them. It will make the feminists angry, but again you will argue, “Do you want to allow doctors to practice bad medicince?” What applies to all other areas of medicine must also apply to the practice of abortion or else medicine will become uncontrollable with doctors doing their own thing with the plea, “but that is what they wanted”. Doctors must never practice according to the patient’s requests or demands as a right or political pressure or bribes. They must always do what is best for the long term health of each patient regardless of rank, sex, normality, religion etc. It is the duty of the government to ensure, through prosecution if need be, that doctors stick to good ethics and good science in every area of their practice. Sadly, the practice of abortion has become an exception to this necessary medical-political dictum. Abortion became an exception to all the controlling regulations of medical practice because of the social inflence of blind feminism.

Good medical practice only Every doctor, no matter what kind of practice, as soon as he offers or implies to offer some form of medical treatment to a person, has made a contract to be that person’s physician until the patient is well and discharged, referred somewhere else or dies. He has assumed all the rights, benefits and obligations of a physician. That person has become his patient. Then the doctor must carefully and objectively examine this patient. Based on his examination, the doctor makes a recommendation for some form of treatment or tell the patient, treatment is unnecessary or if beyond his skill, refer the patient to someone more capable. In all this, the physician must be guided by the most ancient tenet in medicine, “primum non nocere” If there is any doubt about the whether or not what he can offer will more help or harm his patient, he must “first do no harm”. To ignore this dictum, that physician discredits himself and should come under his colleagues censure. Unless he quickly corrects his ways, his license to practice must be withdrawn. Before he makes his recommendation for treatment, this doctor must ensure that the proposed treatment: a) based on his examination and his evidence based practice, he makes a clear recommendation of a particular treatmen. b) is good for the group of patient of which this patient is part. He must be sure the proposed treatment is beneficial to this group of patients based on his thorough understanding of the latest and best scientific literature, ie evidence based medicine. c) is beneficial for this patient. He must be convinced that this patient in particular, based on his examination, will benefit have better health after an abortion. d) will not result in permanent harm to this patient.. e) that though there may be some untoward side effects, the long term benefit will outweigh any hurt. f) that other forms treatment which are less invasive and more reversible have been offered and tried. This will take time. g) that the doctor will perform the treatment that he recommends in good conscience. He must be convinced by a careful follow-up of his patients who have had the same treatment that what he is about to do is in his patient’s long term best interests. h) is first dealt with by remediating the predisposing preconditions.. (Deal with the boy friend’s coercion or the family’s poverty that makes the women want an abortion first, if not personally then refer to some agency that will.) i) that without presssure or prejudice, this patient is provided all the information necessary to make an informed decision on whether or not to accept the doctors recommendation for treatment. j) that all the other social options for a person with this condition (pregnancy) have been made available. ( There are at least 9 options for women who feel it is impossible to have a baby at this time. Ref “pregnancy options” Eg. closed adoptions, open personal adoptions, adopting mother and child, temporary foster care, orphanages for mother and child until she is able to get on her feet etc. k) that the patient has sufficient time to consider this information and if needed, obtain a 2nd medical opinion. (There are at least 53 factors that must be understood and remediated, taking up to 6 months, before the patient can truly make a rational decision about the recommeded abortion). l) that the doctor does a long term follow up of his (aborted) patient and provides treatment for any untoward effects.

The obligation to prove lies with the proponent. If all of these prerequisites were in place, abortions would be very very rare. We can never say never because science has learned there may be exceptons to every rule. The problem has been that the licensing bodies have let abortionists get away with murder. In no other area of medicine has this happened. In fact, the government and physician controlled licensing bodies have become more strict. In all this, keep in mind that in medicine, the proof for the 17 (necessary conditionsa to l) lies with the doctor about to perform the procedure and those who refer to him and those who financially or politically support him. If called into question by patient, family, colleague, licensing body, court or government, he and those who support him, must be able to show beyond reasonable doubt, he has fulfilled all these prerequisites. Without fulfilling these the abortionist has performed and assault upon the patient and is liable to criminal conviction. He/she has done damage without good medical reason and is also liable to conviction for damages. Colleagues do have an obligation to question what an abortionist is doing, especially because intuitively it seems such poor practice. They should attempt to: i) show he is wrong with rational argument and scientific evidence, ii) report him to his medical licensing body, iii) not associate with him in any way that would to give the appearance of supporting or tolerating what he is doing, iv) persue research that uncovers the truth of a questionable practice. Yet remember that though prolife physicians have this responsibility, their’s is not the burdern of proof. The primary obligation is not to prove doing abortions is bad medicine, it is to show with long term studies of large populations with contrast groups, that providing healthy women abortions by killing their children is good medicine. Be assured there is no such evidence and I am convinced there never will be. There have far too few scientific studies of abortion. The reasons are that those who perform or support abortion have successfully taken the question from the quality of medical care to one of women’s rights. Those who question the practice of abortion are not being given a reasonable chance; very little funding and little opportunity to present in scientific meetings or get published.

The best evidence on the effects of abortion To date, the best evidence regarding the current practice of abortion is that: i) there are no proper established group or individual indications for abortions, except in very rare instances. Pregnancy is not a disease. Even then triage applies. This means that if there must be a choice (between mother and preborn infant) the person who is most likely to benefit, will be treated first). ii) there is no proof of benefit to women or family or society. iii) it is irreversible and therefore it has life long effects. iv) it damages the most essential maternal instincts that sustain families and make civilizations possible eg. the “Species Specific Instinctual Restraint to Aggression. v) it damages emotional health; increased rates of depression, suicide, post partum psychosis etc. vi) it damages physical heatth; increased rates of breast cancer, immune disorders, etc. vii) it damages interpersonal relationships. There are increased rates: poor pair bonding, poor mother infant bonding, homicide, etc. viii) it is the basic reason for the current “recession” Every country has exponentially declinning fertility rates and most have population implosion. You cannot run a free market economy with declining population. Growing populations create demand for goods and services which creates jobs. A person might argue, but the world’s population cannot grow indefinitely. The universe has the capacity to sustain and infinitely growing human population, if only people would stop killing each other and use the means at our present disposal to colonized the planets and star systems. ix) because abortion was put in place and stay in place through dishonesty and deciet, it is undermining the medical, judicial and political systems our fore fathers fought to base on integrity, humanity, justice and freedom. x) it has created massive numbers of people with existential guilt and a feeling the value of their lives and everyone else, is relative to how much they are wanted, instead of being essentially invaluable. This makes killing by murder, infanticide, euthanasia and war so much easier. xi) it is progressively dehumanizing everyone, me included. It is robbing the world of scientific genius and extraordinay artistic talent. We are all the losers. xii) it is leaving a trail of guilt and disoder that will effect future generations even if the current practice stopped now.

Your best tactic REMEMBER THIS. Do not get into discussions with proabortion minded people about the science that supports these statements.(i to xii). There is plenty of it but all research is incomplete. Insist that the proabortion minded people demonstrate scientifially that these statements are not true. It is their obligation to ensure none of these are true, before doing an abortion. ALSO REMEMBER THIS. Proabortion minded people must prove the preborn baby in not a person. After all they are about to “kill it”. Keep insisting, “you must prove this preborn child is not a person”. “From casual observation and from science we find he and she has all the characteristics of a person”. “Show we are wrong if you can. Otherwise, you must admit you are about to murder and innocent person”. There is no evidence, just common cant that asserts the baby is any kind of object. As the kids put it. “Put up or shut up” Do not become embroiled in arguments about rights.; except to remember this. No one can be given an unfettered right to harm or kill another person. Since science shows that in 99.98% of cases, abortion does only harm, under the current practice, abortionists appear to be given the right to kill and harm without having to answer to anyone. This is illogical, unscientific and unjust. It undermines the fundamentals of all justice.

Reproductive rights so called True reproductive rights are the freedoms to keep on having as many children as the parents wish, to welcome each one in the name of Creator God and to able to provide all the ingredients each child needs to become the person God designed he and she to become. It is not to kill those who are unwanted. The feminist chant of Margret Sanger, “the first right of every child is to wanted” and “every child a wanted child” is a philosophy of the most pernicious evil kind there has been. The resulting effect is that no one has the God given, inailiable right to exist. Wantedness now determines who lives and who dies. Everyone from the highest to the lowest must now worry about being wanted, being popular, being approved. Their life depends on it. It is small wonder there is so little original thought, so little action based on conviction. The proabortion people could never know how fundamentally wrong they are. The correct and only pragmatic attitude can be, THE ONLY INALIENABLE RIGHTS OF EVERYONE ARE TO BE.AND, TO BE ALL THAT GOD INTENDED THEM TO BE. AND TO BE WELCOMED INTO A COMPLETE NATURAL FAMILY. Anyone who denies or counters this is undermining their own existence.

Abortion Reformation Of course things could be better. Everything except the Word of God needs to be improved. To believe and/or act conservatively is to deny your Lord. For Jesus was a reformer in everything He did. Christians are far too often made to look foolish by trying to be conserve institutions that need major changes. Of course the abortion law of the Philippines needs to be changed and you, Pilar, should be the first to say so. Don’t be caught defending something that is imperfect. Your country’s law was based on what was is now obviously ignorance.. After much reading, research, treating post abortion people, probably more than anyone else in the world, I have come to the conclusion that women who abort their children are temporarily insane. It is not PTSD or Dssociation. Long ago it was decided that you cannot legally prosecute someone who commited a felony while insane. Ref. McNaughton’s Rules. If a lovely, loving women does something that is very uncharacteristic of her, we exclaim, “That couldn’t have been the women I know. She must have been out of her mind. She’s lost it completely. I wonder what could have happened to her?” And so it is with anyone who does something they would not have done ” in their right mind”. I believe the evidence supports this conclusion. It partly explains why later that post abortion person is wont to say. “What have I done? Please someone explain how I could have killed my own child” Or women’s mother will say, “You tell me that my daughter had an abortion. Frankly I don’t believe you. You must be lying. I know my girl and she isn’t someone who would do that” No species destroys its own young. Any species that does has gone beserke. For a loving women to destroy her beautiful, tender, innocent child is so unthinkable, she must be crazy and she is. She has lost contact with reality. The only way she can maintain her sanity post abortion is to quickly accept and believe abortion minded rhetoric. “It wasn’t a baby, just a piece of tissue” “I was forced to by my misogynist boy friend.” “It is my right and I will defend it, even if I have to hurt my family” This is why post abortion treatment is so difficult. Every person must see how far off reality they went. To accept the reality of the baby’s personhood is so mind boggling it is, without the intervention of Jesus, impossible. This being so, you cannot prosecute a woman for having an abortion. So an Abortion Reformation must include:

a) dropping prosecution of women who have an abortion. b) Providing all the necessary ingredients that make having every baby a joy. c Insist that every abortion must meet the standard of good medical practice, I described above. d) Prosecute every aborting person who does not fulfill these criteria. e) Remove the license of every physician who does abortions that don’t meet these criteria. f) Sue for damages all those who abort or refer or aid and abette those who abort without these criteria being met. g) Provide government funding for good research on abortion. i) Provide government funding to make available the 8 options women should have as alternatives to abortion. h) Develope appropriate ways of welcoming everychild and drop the stupid pernicious rhetoric of “wanted child” I) Show how having children is good for the economy. j) Initiate cooperative plans to colonize outside Terra. k) Help restore the joys of parenting in the minds of women and men while they are in school. l) Drop “sex education” (It does not work), in favor of “health education” which includes all the benefits of caring for oneself, because “I have been welcomed and I am extremely valuable.” m) Provide government funding, as a necessary treatment, for any abortion that meets all the criteria. (There will be virtually none but you will be seen to not be idealogically opposed to abortion.)

Advice Spend your efforts on a much more practical, scientific approach as above, than on trying to counter their specious proposal. Don’t hesitate to debate them, any time, almost any place. But when you do, put most of your effort into making them prove that their approach will provide health and not harm to women. And don’t accept “I know a woman who…..” arguments. Insist on scientific proof.

Sincerely. Philip G Ney MD FRCP(C)

PS. You have my permission to duplicate and promulgate this work, judicially and with permission of Pioneer Publishing which holds the copywrite.

Dear Pro-life Friends, attached is an article from the Center for Reproductive Rights, NY promoting the legalization of abortion in the Phil. Your comments will be greatly appreciated so that we can reply as soon as possible to their pronouncements. many thanks and God bless you all. Sr.Pilar